[xdebug-general] Re: Is the xdebug's non-free license necessary?

From: Derick Rethans <derick[@]xdebug.org>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:06:45 +0100 (CET)


On Sun, 19 Dec 2004, Jan Minar wrote:

> AFAICT, the only non-free section is:
> <quote href="http://www.xdebug.org/license.php">
> 4. Products derived from this software may not be called "Xdebug", nor
> may "Xdebug" appear in their name, without prior written permission from
> derick[@]xdebug.org.
> </quote>

All I did was copy the PHP license and changed PHP to Xdebug... So it's
just as free as PHP. Actually, this is just a BSD license with the
advertising clause. Nothing non-free about it. Basically you can do
everything what you want, except creating a product using Xdebug and
naming it Xdebug.

From the PHP license (http://www.php.net/license/3_0.txt):
  4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
     may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
     from group[@]php.net. You may indicate that your software works in
     conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
     it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"

> This is a PITA, 'cause this effectively prevents a package with the name
> ``libxdebug-php4'' in the Debian archive, bugfixes, and similar. The
> sole effect of this clause will be You'll end up with a package/fork
> with a completely different name, that is pulling diffs from Your xdebug
> version. Kinda scratching Your ear with the wrong hand, isn't it?

For all I know Debian's package would not be a derived product... so I
don't see the problem. It's not a problem for PHP either, is it? Besides
that, the package name should be php-xdebug (it works in both php4 and
php5) as it's just a normal extension, like the mysql extension.

> I did a little research on google, and it seems like some past versions
> were licensed under the Artistic license. Its wording doesn't lead to
> the abovementioned PITAs:
> <quote href=http://www.opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license.php">
> 3. You may otherwise modify your copy of this Package in any way, provided
> that you insert a prominent notice in each changed file stating how and
> when you changed that file [...]
> </quote>

I don't want other people that use Xdebug to have to place a notice in
their software, and Xdebug was never under any other license than the
current one.

> Would You consider altering the non-free clause, please?

I think the current license is totally fine, it's about as free as you
can get.


Xdebug | http://xdebug.org | xdebug-general@lists.xdebug.org
Received on Sun Dec 19 2004 - 21:06:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jun 25 2018 - 06:00:04 BST